Makadara Member of Parliament George Aladwa has come out in defense of Kenya's Government-to-Government (G-to-G) petroleum importation arrangement. He argues that the programme should be assessed through verifiable figures rather than political claims. The debate over the deal's cost, transparency, and effectiveness has intensified. Aladwa, who is also the Nairobi County Orange Democratic Movement chairman, stated that the arrangement was introduced to address a severe foreign-exchange shortage that threatened Kenya's ability to finance petroleum imports and maintain reliable fuel supplies.
The G-to-G arrangement was introduced in 2023, providing for petroleum imports on credit terms of up to 180 days. This was a significant improvement from the much shorter payment period that previously placed heavy pressure on the foreign-exchange market. The National Treasury said the arrangement aimed to ease dollar liquidity pressures and reduce exchange-rate volatility. Aladwa emphasized that reality should form the starting point of the current debate, citing President William Ruto's challenge to critics to compare Kenya's actual landed cost of petroleum with that of neighboring countries.
Aladwa's comments come amid renewed scrutiny of the arrangement following Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni's remarks about Uganda's previous procurement of petroleum products through intermediaries in Kenya. Museveni stated that Uganda had subsequently changed its procurement model. Aladwa argued that Uganda's procurement choices should not automatically be used to judge Kenya's system, as countries can adopt different suppliers, credit arrangements, pricing structures, and procurement mechanisms.
The government has maintained that the arrangement helped address the dollar shortage while securing fuel supplies. Energy Cabinet Secretary Opiyo Wandayi recently said petroleum imports previously required about Sh64.82 billion monthly, representing roughly 35 per cent of the country's total import bill. Payments were previously required within five days of cargo receipt. Under the G-to-G framework, international suppliers provide petroleum on extended credit, easing the immediate demand for dollars.
The government has also reported reductions in import premiums for petrol, diesel, and aviation fuel since the arrangement began. However, Aladwa emphasized that defending the programme should not mean shielding it from scrutiny. He called for contracts, import prices, premiums, freight charges, and other relevant documentation to be made available where allegations of wrongdoing are raised.
Aladwa's defense of the G-to-G arrangement comes as the government faces criticism over the deal's cost and transparency. He argued that critics should also explain what alternative procurement model they would propose and how it would address the foreign-exchange and fuel-supply challenges that prompted the arrangement. The debate matters because petroleum costs have a direct effect on transport, food prices, manufacturing, businesses, and household expenses.
Aladwa concluded that the way forward should be evidence-based: defend G-to-G where the figures support it, investigate concerns where evidence raises questions, and improve the system where weaknesses are established. He urged those making accusations to bring facts and for the Government to publish and defend the numbers. Let Parliament and relevant oversight institutions scrutinize the arrangement, and let Kenyans judge the evidence for themselves.
Key points
- The G-to-G arrangement was introduced to address a severe foreign-exchange shortage that threatened Kenya's ability to finance petroleum imports and maintain reliable fuel supplies.
- The arrangement has helped address the dollar shortage while securing fuel supplies, with reported reductions in import premiums for petrol, diesel, and aviation fuel.
- Aladwa emphasized the need for an evidence-based debate, calling for verifiable figures and scrutiny of the arrangement.
